B.04_Consolidation DF_22R0016_DLA B163B164_28Jul22.pdf

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Source Selection Information, See FAR 3.104

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT

CONSOLIDATION OF CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS DETERMINATION FOR

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA) DEFENSE DISTIRBUTION JACKSONVILLE

FLORIDA (DDJF) B163/B164 ROOF TRUSS REPAIRS PROJECT, NAVAL AIR

STATION (NAS) JACKSONVILLE, DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

(As prescribed by FAR 7.107-2 and AFARS 5107.107-2)

RATIONALE

1. Consolidation may provide substantial benefits to the Government. However, because of the potential impact on small business participation, before conducting an acquisition that is a consolidation of requirements with an estimated total dollar value exceeding $2 million, a written determination shall be made that the consolidation is necessary and justified in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 657q , after ensuring that --

(a) Market research has been conducted;

(b) Any alternative contracting approaches that would involve a lesser degree of consolidation have been identified;

(c) The determination is coordinated with the agency's Office of Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization or the Office of Small Business Programs;

(d) Any negative impact by the acquisition strategy on contracting with small business concerns has been identified; and

(e) Steps are taken to include small business concerns in the acquisition strategy.

2. Introduction: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Jacksonville District plans to solicit offers for a Design-Bid- Build, firm fixed price construction contract to repair Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Defense Distribution Jacksonville (DDJF) Buildings 163 and 164 structures with termite damage on the Naval Air Station (NAS) Jacksonville, Florida and has conducted market research that demonstrates consolidation of this procurement to be both necessary and justified. FAR 2.102 defines consolidation as

(1) a solicitation for a single contract, a multiple-award contract, a task order, or a delivery order to satisfy -- (i) two or more requirements of the Federal agency for supplies or services that have been provided to or performed for the Federal agency under two or more separate contracts, each of which was lower in cost than the total cost of the contract for which offers are solicited; or (ii) requirements of the Federal agency for construction projects to be performed at two or more discrete sites; or;

(2) separate contract as used in this definition, means a contract that has been

CUI – Controlled Unclassified Information performed by any business, including small and other than small business concerns.

3. Description of Procurement Action:

a. Project Description: This requirement is for a Design-Bid- Build, firm fixed price, construction contract for the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Defense Distribution Defense Jacksonville Florida (DDJF) buildings 163 (B163) and 164 (B164) on NAS Jacksonville, Florida. This project repairs the existing B163 and B164 structures resulting from termite damage. The buildings support the DLA DDJF, DLA Avionics (AV) and Fleet Readiness Center Southeast (FRCSE) organizations in the mission critical work at Naval Air Station (NAS) Jacksonville. The project consists of repairing heavy timber framed roof trusses in two 1940’s-era warehouses which sustained termite damage. These repairs will be done on buildings located on Federal Land. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code assigned to this requirement is 236220. The estimated value of this requirement is a total capacity of $9,248,700.00 with a period of performance of 720 calendar days. This procurement will be set aside for Small Business. The Jacksonville District has conducted market research that demonstrates consolidation of this procurement is both necessary and justified.

Work include repairs to the timber bowstring trusses, the tie rod systems at the bottom chords of the bowstring trusses, replacement of columns, and associated shoring.

The work includes replacement/retrofit of damaged truss components (top chords, bottom chords, vertical and diagonal web members, and column kickers), remediation of delaminated top chords, replacement of timber spaced columns, installation of end plates to the tie rod repair system, replacement of damaged tie rods, and tensioning of tie rods.

Work also includes in-kind replacement of monitor framing, wall and roof sheathing, and roof membrane repair where necessary to facilitate other work. Temporary relocation and support of the utilities supported by the roof framing system may also be necessary to facilitate the repairs. Unique project features include split-ring timber connectors. Work spans across several trusses in multiple buildings. Estimated to be over 50 trusses in need of repair. These repairs will be done on buildings located on Federal Land.

b. Acquisition Strategy/Procurement Summary: The Jacksonville District intends to procure the subject requirement as a request for proposal (RFP). The acquisition approach is to utilize a design-bid-build contract for construction as it is in the best interest of the Government with respect to timeliness, oversight, and administrative costs.

The subject requirement will be procured as a 100% Small Business set-aside, open to all small businesses exhibiting capability to perform design-bid-build construction projects. The procurement method for this requirement will use trade off procedures authorized by 10 U .S.C3104. This requirement will be a procured a “C” type design-bid-build contract. This procurement approach is necessary to achieve timely acquisition support for USACE construction programs. Use of a consolidated contract is in the best interest of the government with respect to timeliness, oversight, and administrative costs.

c. Applicability of Consolidation: As implemented in FAR 2.101, consolidation or consolidated requirement means a solicitation for a single contract, a multiple-award contract, a task order, or a delivery order to satisfy -- (i) Two or more requirements of the Federal agency for supplies or services that have been provided to or performed for the Federal agency under two or more separate contracts, each of which was lower in cost than the total cost of the contract for which offers are solicited; or (ii) Requirements of the Federal agency for construction projects to be performed at two or more discrete sites.

The definition applies to this procurement as this procurement has two (2) buildings to be repaired on NAS Jacksonville, IAW FAR 2.101(ii).

d. Requirements Being Consolidated: DLA DDJF buildings 163 and 164 contain severe termite damage to the roof trusses. These are two 100,000 ft warehouses used by DLA DDJF to store key materials and equipment in support of all the Naval Florida Military operations, Jacksonville Fleet Readiness Center Southeast (FRCSE) (P8 and all other active aircraft including helos), South East Readiness Mission Critical (SERMC) at Naval Station Mayport for military fleet, Cecil Field operations, and Blount Island Command. The warehouses house all the F35 engines and associated components for repairs at NAS Jacksonville to the subject plane engines.

e. Procurement History: This is a new standalone requirement. Currently, Jacksonville District does not have a current contract vehicle (IDIQ), nor borrowed capacity, that can be utilized to meet this need.

f. Rationale for Consolidation: In order to be determined necessary and justified, the benefits of the consolidated acquisition must substantially exceed the benefits that would be derived from alternative contracting approaches that involve a lesser degree of consolidation. Such benefits may include quantifiable cost savings or price reductions as well as other benefits, regardless of whether quantifiable in dollar amounts, to include quality improvements that will save time or improve or enhance performance or efficiency, reduction in acquisition cycle time, better terms or conditions, or any other supportable benefit.

Benefits that are quantifiable are considered substantial if they meet the dollar amounts set forth in FAR 7.107-2(d). These thresholds are: (i) Ten percent of the estimated contract or order value (including options) if the value is $94 million or less; or

(ii) Five percent of the estimated contract or order value (including options) or $9.4 million, whichever is greater, if the value exceeds $94 million. If the quantifiable benefits do not meet these thresholds, the approving authority may determine that consolidation is necessary and justified if the expected benefits of the consolidated approach are critical to the agency’s mission success and the procurement strategy provides for maximum practicable participation by small business.

For this procurement, the quantifiable benefits of consolidation, as required by

FAR 7.107-2(d), will not meet the requirement of substantial benefits that exceeds ten percent of the estimated value of $9,248,700.00. However, the qualitative benefits are critical to the agency’s mission success and the procurement strategy provides for maximum practical participation by small business. In addition to the Government’s estimated cost avoidance (savings) of $160,000.00 (as shown in Table 2 below), consolidating the requirements into a single contract will provide quality improvements to

1) meet security needs on the nation, 2) provide DLA with the needed storage to support Fleet Readiness Center Southeast mission, and 3) provide a safe environment. Also, consolidating this requirement will significantly reduce acquisition cycle times which is essential for national security measures and DLA Defense Distribution Jacksonville mission success. Reducing the acquisition timeline allows DLA Defense Distribution Jacksonville to continue being the single point of entry for customers turn into Deposition Center, support Department of Defense vital mission requirements, and perform depot maintenance on aircraft engines, avionics, airframes and other electronic components.

These activities are critical to the rework facilities and maintenance teams that travel worldwide to assist air squadrons and other units requiring aircraft maintenance, modification and repair work. The airplanes, engines, and components repaired at the FRCSE are critical items for the Warfighter in their combat arenas around the world. In addition to the FRCSE DLA Distribution Jacksonville also supports The Expeditionary Warfare Center (EXWC), US Navy Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to the U.S. Customs Service. DLA Distribution Jacksonville's customer base.

g. Benefit Analysis:

(i) Quality. Unnecessary performance and schedule risk at each phase of construction can be mitigated through consolidating the efforts and having one contractor coordinate all construction efforts among the sites. Continuity of effort will greatly reduce performance and schedule risk at each phase of construction to include demolition, site work, facility construction, fit and finishes of the end product, acceptance and warranty of construction.

Consolidating requirements is necessary and beneficial to meet mission requirements based on the security requirements of a project located on the Naval Air Station (NAS) Jacksonville, the scarcity of space for lay down areas and construction trailers, and the unique coordination requirements at the projects’ sites due to ongoing construction.

The relatively small real estate footprint of the two (2) buildings creates both coordination and scheduling issues. The buildings are approximately 100 ft or less apart.

Having multiple contractors completing construction repair work of the two (2) existing buildings so close together create space issues for contractors to coordinate efforts. There is limited amount of space for lay down areas and construction trailers. Additionally, the logistics of moving people and materials to job sites are extremely challenging. Having several different contractors working in the same area at one time within the confined space is nearly impossible. Utilizing multiple contractors would result in lay down areas that are inconvenient to the project site resulting in additional project costs due to increased time for getting materials to project sites. The image below shows the proximity of the two buildings.

Consolidating enables one contractor to schedule the work (equipment and workforce) efficiently since that contractor alone is in control to these sites. This increase in efficiency facilitates not only the delivery of quality, on-time, and on-budget products, it also reduces performance risk to the government. Having one contractor working on the project site reduces the potential of multiple contractors working in such close proximity of each other, which could potentially impact progress on all of the projects.

There are scheduling issues as contractors must coordinate efforts to operate machinery and the trucks needed to remove construction materials debris to the disposal site. The Government and contractors would also have additional safety concerns if using multiple contractors. Ensuring proper operation of heavy construction equipment without centrally coordinating the efforts is a major safety concern.

Each contractor will be required to not only gain familiarity with USACE rules and regulations; they must also gain familiarity with tenant safety, environmental policies, DLA and NAS regulations. Each new contractor experiences a severe learning curve that results in extra costs to the Government. Having one contractor that is already familiar with the policies for both will accommodate projects that have short timeframes for startup and completion as well as decreased extra costs attributed to learning curves experienced by new contractors to the Government. It would also increase the efficiency of the projects, resulting in higher quality products for the Government.

Utilizing a consistent construction chain ensures the coordination and end product are consistent for both buildings. This will ensure consistent quality and appearance throughout the site and mitigate variances in appearance ensuring professional end product.

(ii) Reduction in acquisition cycle times. The Consolidation will allow for a

DDJF‐00163

DDJF‐00164

reduction in acquisition cycle in order to meet urgent needs of the customer.

The DDJF buildings 163 and 164 are to store key materials and equipment in support of the North Florida military operations which include the Naval Air Station (NAS) Jacksonville of FRCSE (P8 and all other active aircraft including helos), SERMC at Naval Station (NS) Mayport for military fleet, Cecil Field operations, and Blount Island Command. DDJF building 163 will specifically house all the F35 engines and associated components for repairs for the subject planes at NAS Jacksonville. There are five large structural emergency support facilities located in the area that need to be removed to allow for DLA DDJF to store and manage the engines and associated components.

Currently, there are no other available storage locations for the F35 engines and components.

A significant reduction in the acquisition cycle can be achieved by consolidating these projects under a single contract to meet the mission objectives as it alleviates costs associated with acquisition planning and contract execution, it shortens contracting lead time by having only one procurement lead time versus separate staggered cycles, assures operational continuity, and ensures efficient sequencing of the building repairs.

As discussed below, it takes approximately 6 months of the acquisition cycle for each project.

If the projects were procured separately, the Jacksonville District would need require separate procurement plans and specifications, separate IGE’s, separate BCOES reviews, separate advertisements, and source selection boards. The reduced acquisition life cycle results in a significant time and cost savings. Consolidating the projects into a single procurement saves at least 60 days per project of engineering time as well as saving at least 120 days of procurement cycle time per project. While it is understood that it will take 180 days to procure a single contract, using a lesser means of consolidation would increase the acquisition cycle time by an additional 180 days for a total of 360 days. The delay is unacceptable as the contract must be awarded and completed in sufficient time to ensure housing for the DLA DDJF equipment and material.

There are currently no other viable location to store the equipment and materials. The repair work on the trusses will take place in phases and the buildings will be occupied concurrently with the contracted work.

Tables 1 (below) reflect award time required to award one design-bid-build contract. Considering this process would have the be doubled if individual contracts for each building were used, there is considerable lead time savings with consolidation of these requirements. These days are based on standard procurement timelines developed by Contracting for FY22 procurements.

Table 1 –Time Required for Design Bid Build Contracts

Timeline Design-Bid-Build Engineering solicitation package development / Market Research report / Sources Sought 30 Day BCOES 30 Days Procurement Package received 1 Day Small business coordination 7 Days Source Selection Plan criteria development 7 Days Business Oversight Branch Review 5 Days Legal Review- solicitation 5 Days Issue Pre -solicitation Notice 15 Days Solicitation 30 Days Tech Evaluation/ Price Evaluation 21 Days Discussion/ Clarifications (if needed) 7 Days Prepare technical Report / Price Analysis 7 Days Prepare SSDD 5 Days Prepare award 5 Days Legal Review - award 5 Days Contract Award 180 Days

(iii) Cost Savings. IAW FAR 7.107-2(d)(1) “Benefits that are quantifiable in dollar amounts are substantial if individually, in combination, or in the aggregate the anticipated financial benefits are equivalent to.

(ii) Five percent of the estimated contract or order value (including options) or $9.4 million, whichever is greater, if the value exceeds $94 million.

(2) Benefits that are not quantifiable in dollar amounts shall be specifically identified and otherwise quantified to the extent feasible.

(3) Reduction of administrative or personnel costs alone is not sufficient justification for consolidation unless the cost savings are expected to be at least 10 percent of the estimated contract or order value (including options) of the consolidated requirements, as determined by the senior procurement executive or chief acquisition officer (15 U.S.C. 657q(c)(2)(B)).

The estimated contract value is $$9,248,700.00 which is less than $94 million.

Therefore approximately $920K in cost savings, 10% if less than $94 million, needs to be shown in cost savings. By consolidating the two project sites into one contract, administrative costs are reduced. Only one solicitation process source selection board will be required by consolidating; and only one group of Jacksonville District personnel will be needed to oversee the project. Table 2 below reflect the estimated total pre-award/award costs required for one design-bid-build contract in comparison to multiple design-bid-build contracts. These costs are based on standard labor costs developed by Project Management for FY19 procurements, along with historical average procurement support costs for Contracting, Cost Engineering Division, Programs and Project Management Division (PPMD), and Engineering Division, for acquisition coordination, document review, IGE development, site visit attendance, Source Selection Evaluation Board labor, and related document preparation, travel, and administration.

Table 2 –Program Cost to Award Design-Bid-Build Contract

ORGANIZATION LABOR TRAVEL

Contracting $25,000.00 $0.00

Cost Engineering $15,000.00 $0.00

Engineering $33,000.00 $2,500.00

Construction $20,000.00 $2,500.00

Planning $5,000.00 $0.00

Project Management $57,000.00 $0.00

Subtotal $155,000.00 $5,000.00 Total Program Cost to Award a Single Design-Bid-Build Contract

$160,000.00

There are two sites being consolidated, therefore when considering the costs to the program for awarding two stand stand-alone type “C” contracts, cost savings are estimated at $160,000.00.

Additional non-quantifiable cost savings will be realized by consolidation the work at these locations as a result of security and safety requirements of the project locations, the close proximity of the sites, scarcity of space for lay down areas and construction trailers at the location, and the unique mission critical needs DLA DDJF material and equipment housing availability.

Additional costs for site security, duplication of mobilization costs, and duplication of work force management will be realized for each additional contractor utilized if this project is not consolidated.

The bulk of increased cost risk is realized due to the limited access on site. Should multiple contractors be required to accomplish the required work the limitations on access lead toward increased risk in production delays, damage to completed structures, and scheduling conflicts. This ultimately results in an unreasonable amount of change order risk consequently leading toward exponential higher costs as Government caused delays (result of not consolidating) create a natural conflict of interest as contractors compete for road access and site access for placing materials/vehicles/equipment utilizing the very limited space available to accomplish this work effort efficiently.

Approval of consolidation into a design-bid-build general construction contract will provide cost savings compared to individual procurements and drastically reduce costs risks related to performance, scheduling, and logistics risks. One consolidated “C” Contract will allow the contractor the ability to have long-term relationships with local staffing. These relationships may lower costs and lead to lower risks to pass through to the Government and provide cost savings over time. Not consolidating the two requirements increases the risk of having multiple layers of subcontractors all with conflicting interests in supporting their respective prime contractors.

A single design-bid-build contract maximizes the opportunity to acquire high quality, professional services at competitive prices, while minimizing acquisition time, and performance and schedule risks. Consolidation of this requirement is necessary and in the Government’s best interest and will result in the best value for the Government.

4. Results of Market Research: Sources Sought Notice (SSN), No. W912EP22Z0080 was posted to the GPE from 26 April 2022 to 6 May 2022. Seven firms responded to the Sources Sought Notice and their capability statements were reviewed to determine if the firms were capable of performing the required work. The Government analyzed their capabilities statements and found the following results:

Market research have produced a variety of Small Business concerns that appear capable of performing the consolidated requirement of timber repair for the two buildings, satisfying the requirement. No responses regarding separating the two requirements were received. Two (8)a and HUBZone business, one 8(a), HUBZone, and one EDWOSB business, one HUBZone business, one Small Disadvantaged Veteran Owned Small Business, and two Small Business firms.

The responses were evaluated based on relevant experience and size and complexity to the project requirements posted on the Sources Sought Notice. See descriptions below:

a.) Puyenpa Construction, LLC Not qualified

8(a) and HUBZONE Bonding Capacity: 50M Single, 100M Aggregate Technical Comments: Submitted more than 3 projects. 3 of them that are the largest by dollar value were picked for eval. 1-Ground up Build Refugia and Quarantine Bldgs. at San Marcos Aquatic Resources Center;

$1,760,000: Prep subgrade, remove solid, construct the foundation and building. Site development, construct the building concrete pad and install a metal building: Worked with Dept of Interior (Government contract). Contract value under the solicited contract. No date of performance indicated. Work not directly related to the solicitation. 2- Main Treasury CFIUS 5th Floor Renovation Part 1; $1,709,775: Architectural, electrical, fire alarm & fire sprinkler system, plumbing, communication related renovation work:

Completed for IRS. Dollar value under the anticipated solicitation. Displays experience that is not directly related to the solicitation. 3-Renovation and Abatement of Survivor Outreach Service Building 36000; $1,419,559:

Renovation of a Suite in the Bldg. Hazardous Materials abatement; demo work; architectural, HVAC, plumbing, electrical, and comm. work: Done for Dept. of Army; dollar value under the solicited project. Project date not indicated. However, from the title of the project it appears to be a FY19 project. OVERALL: THIS CONTRACTOR APPEARS TO HAVE

EXPERIENCE THAT IS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE

SOLICITATION AND THE WORK COMPLETED WAS AT A LOWER

VALUE THAN THE SOLICITATION. I HAVE SOME CONDIFENCE IN THIS

CONTRACTOR'S ABILITY TO PERFORM THE SOLICITED WORK.

Contractor does not have heavy timber repair or new construction experience.

b.) SEA PAC Engineering, Inc.

Not qualified

HUBZone Bonding Capacity: 35M Aggregate Technical Comments: 3 past projects provided. 1-Rpr Research Aircraft

Integration Facility Sys., NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center, Edwards AFB, CA; $8,925,004: Multiple Bldgs. repair/modernization; Civil/Site Work;

Demo., HVAC/Mech.; Electrical; BAS; Fire Protection/Alarm;

Partitions/Acoustical Panel Installs; Carpet; Commissioning; TAB: Federal work; not directly related in scope to the solicitation. Value under $10M.

Substantial amount of work completed. the value is close to $9M.

Completed in April 2019 (within last 5 years.). It was a government contract.

2- Limited Rpr/Alteration of Robert F. Peckham Fed. Bldg. and U.S.

Courthouses; $12,859,713: Demo, Architectural, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, Concrete, Fire Sprinkler, Structural Steel work. Demonstrated experience working with Government projects. Contract value within the range of the solicitation. Although the work is not related to solicitation, contractor displays adequate and significant experience to be potentially successful for the solicited project. 3- Inmate Housing Shower Upgrade, Phase 1, US Department of Justice, Metropolitan Detention Center, Los Angeles, CA; $11,904,341: 10 floors/Multi-story Building, Repairs & Modernization; demo, architectural, plumbing, HVAC/Ventilation, electrical, fire sprinkler work: The project was performed in a fully occupied and 24/7/365 operational detention facility, requiring multiple phases, precise sequencing of work to mitigate cons impacts. For Federal Government.

Demonstrates ability to work with a government project. Work completed within last 5 years. Although the work was not directly related to the solicited contract, it demonstrates adequate experience to potentially be successful for the solicited contract. OVERALL: Contracts submitted demonstrate substantial experience working with government agencies. Dollar value of projects falls within the range of the solicited project. Customer names were clearly indicated for contact. Good CPARS evals indicate the customer service objectives may have been achieved.

c.) Talon Veteran Services, Inc.

SDVOSB

Bonding Capacity: 3M Single, 10M Aggregate

Technical Comments: Indicates its core support services to be Roofing Replacement and Repair Services. 1-Master IDIQ VISN 6 - East Region, Dept of VA: This appears to be the IDIQ Umbrella Contract, not a specific project.; 2- East MATOC: Same as the first project, only the umbrella contract is referenced. No specific project is included.; 3- Roof Replacement Bldg. 500; $886,775: Replacement and upgrade of EPDM and Saw Tooth Roof over the front entrance of the main hospital. OVERALL: 2 MATOC umbrella contracts referenced with no actual task order contracts and therefore not evaluated. 3rd project is too small to compare the solicitation.

Overall 4 contracts were included. Used 3 largest projects for eval.

d.) Jordan Construction Company, LLC

8(a), HUBZone Bonding Capacity: 50M Single, 100M Aggregate Technical Comments: Proposes to use Tecta America Corp. as their

Teaming Partner. Jordon submitted three projects that they performed as Prime. One of them included here. Two of them were too small to evaluate.

Also, evaluated the projects performed by the proposed Partner, Tecta. 1- Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, Satellite Blvd Renovation, Duluth, GA;

$3.6M: Roof, windows and doors replacement contract. It also included general carpentry: Performed by Jordon. Not a government contract. Value is not within the range of the solicitation. 2- Hurricane Michael Recovery – Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, GA, NAVFAC; $14,607,914:

Completed by Tecta. The project involved 218k SF of removal of existing systems down to deck, installation of 135 mil fleece back PVC systems, plus 42k SF of new metal wall panels. Work was performed as a sub. It is not clear whether the dollar value of the work completed by Tecta as a sub is included here. It is assumed that this work was a roofing work although it was not clearly indicated other than saying "removal of existing systems down to deck." Otherwise, the additional work included new metal wall panels. 3- San Francisco General Hospital, CA; $6,666,981: Completed by Tecta as Prime Contractor. The project involved 2,207 squares of roof replacement and waterproofing. The bldg. was occupied and operational during the work. 4- Tornado Recovery – Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, GA; $18,284,579: Work performed by Tecta as a subcontractor.

Reroofing of six warehouses damaged by a tornado, remove existing roofs to deck & install 135 mil fleece back PVC systems. OVERALL: Contractor submitted three projects performed as the prime contractor. Only one of them is included here since the other two were smaller contracts. The contractor also submitted 5 contracts performed by its proposed Partner (Tecta). Only 3 contracts by Tecta is included as the rest of them were smaller in scale or dollar value. Although the proposed Partner appears to be a large contractor, all work included is roof replacement related. No projects are directly related to the solicitation. Tecta completed a $6.7M roof replacement project as the Prime Contractor. However, the other two projects listed here were performed as a Subcontractor. Therefore the actual value of the subcontracted portion is not known for these projects. It is hard to establish "confidence" based on what is submitted. Tecta being a large contractor may have resources to potentially be successful for the solicited contract. But, there is some "uncertainty."

e.) Foresight Construction Group

Qualified Small Business Bonding Capacity: 20M Single, 60M Aggregate Technical Comments: 1- FRCSE Bldg. 101U West HVAC Modifications;

$9,189,509: Replacement of major components of the Central Energy Plant mechanical systems, including chillers, cooling towers and related components. Demo, re-roofing, architectural, electrical, life safety, and fire protection work was also included. Work was completed as the prime contractor and was performed while the facility was occupied and operational. Although this contract is not directly related to the solicitation, it's value is close to the range of the solicitation. Completed within last 5 years. A government contract. Foresight performed extremely well in this contract finishing it significantly before the contract required completion date. 2- The Rock North Campus Worship Facility, Gainesville, FL;

$10,023,785.00: Involved a new church campus. Structural, site, civil, electric, mech, etc. Illustrates the ability to construct structural aspects of contract. Not directly related to the work in solicitation. Completed as the prime contractor. Not a government contract. 3- Institute of Black Culture & Institute of Hispanic-Latino Cultures; Gainesville, FL; $9,900,000: New construction of two separate buildings. Site improvements, utilities, site work, demo, telecommunication, architectural work: Not a government contract. Value is within the range of the solicitation. completed within last 5 years. OVERALL: Based on the past projects completed for North Florida Area Office, I have confidence in this firm that they could team up with a right sub to be successful for the solicited contract.

f.) Bristol Design Build Services, LLC

Qualified Small Business Bonding Capacity: 100M Single, 500M Aggregate Technical Comments: 1- Replacement of Roofs, Warehouse Buildings 6 and 7, Marine Corps Logistics Base (MCLB), Barstow, CA; $6,033,901:

Roof membrane repair; Temporary removal and reinstallation of HVAC, Multiple buildings, Replaced 32,400 SF of damaged plywood roof sheathing, replaced 880 clerestory windows, Government DoD project. Completed within last 5 years. Value is a bit smaller than the solicitation project range.

2- SRM Timber Structure Repairs, DLA Distribution Red River, Red River

Army Depot (RRAD), TX; $6,917,403: structural repairs associated with heavy timber framed roof trusses and columns with column corbels within 10 DLA Distribution and 4 Red River Army Depot buildings. Repairs include following: replacement of chord members, installation of chord splice split rings, fasteners and tightening chord plies; replacement of columns, installation column angle clamps and columns anchors; replacement of corbels, installation of corbel split rings and fasteners, and tightening of existing corbel fasteners; as well as structural shoring associated with the trusses and truss repairs. Work completed in a Phased approach to limit impact to RRAD's operations in 10 RRAD buildings. This project is directly related to the solicited contract, however, the value of the contract is a bit smaller than the solicited contract. government contract. Completed within last 5 years. 3- F35 Missile Maintenance Facility, Eielson AFB, AK; $18.8M:

Scope included structural, roofing, civil work, interior finishes, and exterior finishes, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and telecommunication systems.

Completed within last 5 years. Scope is not directly related to the solicitation. Contract value is within the solicitation range. Completed for USACE. OVERALL: The firm appears to be capable to perform the solicited contract. North Florida Area Office previously worked with this contractor, however, the dollar value of the contracts that this contractor was involved were significantly smaller than the solicitation. However, Bristol overall performed well in the past projects.

Contractor has 1 previous project which includes heavy timber repair.

g.) KBT Contracting

8(a), HUBZone, EDWOSB Bonding Capacity: 6M Single, 12M Aggregate Technical Comments 1- Harden Facilities with Hurricane Resistant

Windows, Everglades National Park, FL; $3,480,796: Prime contractor.

Replacement of windows and storefront systems. Project is for National Park Service. It is a government contract. Not relevant to the solicitation.

Value is not close to the solicitation range. The rest of the projects submitted are too small in value to consider.

Based on the findings, it was determined that there were at least two qualified, available, and interested small business contractors that are able to perform the consolidated work and demonstrating adequate competition under a Small Business set-aside procurement.

5. Alternative Contracting Approaches and Rationale for Rejection:

a. Stand-alone Design-Bid-Build Contracts: The Jacksonville District considered issuing multiple stand-alone design-bid-build RFPs for this work. This alternative would have a tremendous impact on schedule and project cost. Separate acquisitions adds at least 180 days to the acquisition schedule per each contract accomplished beyond the first contract. This alternative also duplicates the acquisition process for each contract for plans and specifications (Division 1), IGE, and BCOES review resulting in a large increase in administrative costs. Furthermore, the amount of in-house labor and associated costs would significantly increase during each acquisition phase. In short, on smaller projects procuring each project individually creates disproportionate in house labor to contract cost ratios.

As previously discussed, these are military sites with limited space. Having multiple contractors working in close proximity to each other would create logistical problems for the contractors, resulting in delays in transporting equipment within the project sites and preventing the contractors from moving freely in the project sites. As a result, the contract start dates would need to be staggered, resulting in delays for completion of all the projects.

b. Multiple/Single Award Task Order Contracts: The Jacksonville District considered using a Multiple & Single Award Task Order Contracts. However, there are no current active Multiple or Single Award Task Order Contracts at Jacksonville District that are able to meet this acquisition requirements to repair over 50 timber bowstring trusses.

Although a Multiple and or Single Award Task Order Contract would eliminate consolidation if individual task orders are awarded for each requirement, the time to procure and administer separate task orders for each project would increase significantly or alternatively, if constructed at the same time, and interfere with DLA’s ability to 1) meet security requirements, 2) provide DLA with the needed storage to support Fleet Readiness Center Southeast mission, and 3) provide a safe environment. The benefits of a single contract significantly exceed the disadvantages of consolidation and are critical to DLA’s mission success for the reasons outlined above

6. Bundling:

a. Definition of bundling. FAR 2.101 defines bundling as consolidating two or more requirements for supplies or services, previously provided or performed under separate smaller contracts, into a solicitation for a single contract that is likely to be unsuitable for award to a small business concern due to: (i) The diversity, size, or specialized nature of the elements of the performance specified; (ii) The aggregate dollar value of the anticipated award; (iii) The geographical dispersion of the contract performance sites: or (iv) Any combination of the factors described in paragraphs (i) through (iii) of this definition.

b. Applicability of FAR Bundling Definition. This acquisition does not meet the FAR Bundling definition as this requirement has not previously been provided or performed under separate, smaller contracts and is being procured as a Small Business set-aside acquisition.

c. Definition of the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) Bundling Principle.

This principle, as developed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) case law, focuses on whether the combined requirement (new, old, or otherwise) restricts competition, and whether the agency is consolidating or bundling a new requirement unnecessarily. In order to justify CICA Bundling the agency must show "a reasonable basis for why the bundling is necessary to meet the agency need." (Vantex Serv., Inc., B-29041 5, Aug. 8, 2002 and Outdoor Venture Corp., B-299675; B-299676, Jul. 19, 2007). The CICA requires solicitations to provide for full and open competition except where restrictions on competition are necessary to satisfy the procuring agency's needs.

In such a case, restrictions on competition are allowed but only to the extent necessary to satisfy the agency's needs. Bundled procurements combine separate requirements into one contract; thus, they have the potential to restrict competition in violation of CICA by excluding firms that can provide only a portion of the bundled requirement.

d. Applicability of CICA Bundling Principle. CICA Bundling is not applicable to this procurement. The CICA requires solicitations to provide for full and open competition except where restrictions on competition are necessary to satisfy the procuring agency's needs. In such a case, restrictions on competition are allowed but only to the extent necessary to satisfy the agency's needs. Bundled procurements combine separate requirements into one contract; thus, they have the potential to restrict competition in violation of CICA by excluding firms that can provide only a portion of the bundled requirement. However, substantial cost savings achieved through the reduction of duplicative efforts and operational efficiency can be a reasonable basis for restricting competition where requirements are bundled. If the quantifiable benefits do not meet the required thresholds, the approving authority may determine that consolidation is necessary and justified if the expected benefits of the consolidated approach are critical to the agency’s mission success and the procurement strategy provides for maximum practicable participation by small business.

7. Considerations, Facts, Reasoning supporting the determination: All facts, considerations and rationale have been covered previously in the findings. The DD Form 2579 has been signed by the Contracting Officer, Deputy for Small Business and the SBA Procurement Center Representative. All concur that consolidation of this requirement is both necessary and justified.

8. Summary: Consolidation of Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Defense Distribution Jacksonville Florida (DDJF) Buildings 163 and 164 roof truss repairs, maximum flexibility to respond in a timely, efficient and cost effective manner to our customers’ needs.

Although the quantifiable benefits of consolidation, as required by FAR 7.107-2(d), will not meet the requirement of substantial cost benefits, the qualitative benefits are critical to DLA DDJF’s mission success and the procurement encourages small business participation to the maximum extent practicable. This approach will allow USACE Jacksonville to streamline the process for the acquisition cycle for this project.

In addition to the Government’s estimated cost avoidance (savings) of

$160,000.00, consolidating the requirements into a single contract will reduce the repair time for these two buildings by an additional 6 months and will provide quality facilities and qualitative benefits that will allow DLA DDJF to succeed in its mission to provide critical items for the Warfighter in their combat arenas around the world.

The findings of the market research and the documentation provided herein support the conclusion that consolidation of requirements is both necessary and justified.

This decision is based on sound business judgment in view of the location and number of efforts to be executed and the consolidated approach advantages that substantially exceed the benefits of a lesser degree of consolidation.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT

DETERMINATION AND FINDINGS REQUEST FOR CONSOLIDATION

W912EP22R0016 DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA) DEFENSE DISTIRBUTION

JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA (DDJF) B163/B164 ROOF TRUSS REPAIRS PROJECT,

NAVAL AIR STATION (NAS) JACKSONVILLE,

DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

DETERMINATION

Based on the foregoing rationale, I hereby determine, pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulation 7.107-2 and Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 5107.107, that the consolidation of the requirements for of two or more discrete construction repair projects for the Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency Defense Distribution Jacksonville Florida and other Federal Agencies within the South Atlantic Division is both necessary and justified and will serve the best interests of the Government.

Aldone R. Graham Date Chief, Contracting Division Jacksonville District